James v. Hayward Police Department et al

Filing 30

ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF FOR A LIMITED SCOPE REPRESENTATION (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 2/18/2015)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

No. C 13-011 SI (pr)

DENNIS LAMAR JAMES, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
OAKLAND POLICE DEPT.; et al.,

12

Defendants.

13

______________________________/

14

DENNIS LAMAR JAMES, JR.,

15
16
17
18
19

No. C 13-1092 SI

Plaintiff,
ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL
FOR PLAINTIFF FOR A LIMITED
SCOPE REPRESENTATION

v.
HAYWARD POLICE
DEPARTMENT; et al.,
Defendants.
/

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

On January 13, 2015, the court referred these matters to the Federal Pro Bono Project for
counsel to be located for the limited purpose of representing plaintiff in connection with
proceedings to determine whether to appoint a conservator/guardian ad litem to represent him
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17. A representative from the Federal Pro Bono
Project has informed the court that attorneys James Hovard and James Ragon of Dechert LLP,
located at Suite 1600, One Bush Street, San Francisco, CA 94104, are willing to be appointed
to undertake this representation at the request of the Federal Pro Bono Project.
Accordingly, attorneys James Hovard and James Ragon of Dechert LLP are hereby
appointed as counsel for plaintiff in connection with proceedings to determine whether to

1

appoint a conservator/guardian ad litem to represent him pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

2

Procedure 17. The appointment will terminate with the conclusion of those proceedings unless

3

(a) counsel is permitted to withdraw or substitute out before the conclusion of those proceedings

4

or (b) counsel requests appointment for further proceedings. Counsel shall be familiar with

5

General Order No. 25 and the Federal Pro Bono Project Guidelines posted on the Court's

6

website.
The court will hold a case management conference at 3:00 p.m. on April 10, 2015. In

8

light of the appointment of counsel for him and plaintiff's custodial status, plaintiff need not

9

attend the case management conference. The parties shall file any case management statements

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

7

no later than one week before the case management conference. The problem of an incompetent

11

litigant is an unusual one, and the case management conference will be a good starting point to

12

determine whether and what further proceedings are necessary to deal with plaintiff's potential

13

inability to prosecute these cases pro se. The court requests that counsel for plaintiff make

14

inquiries and report in its case management conference statement answers to the following

15

questions: (1) does plaintiff currently have a conservator or any other legal representative

16

authorized to act for him? (2) what is the scope of the conservator's or legal representative's

17

power to act with regard to litigation matters? (3) what is the name of the conservator or legal

18

representative? and (4) if no conservator or legal representative exists yet, is plaintiff agreeable

19

to having a conservator or legal representative appointed to make all decisions in these two

20

pending cases? Defendants also may present their views on the need for the appointment of a

21

conservator or guardian ad litem for plaintiff.

22
23

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 18, 2015

_______________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

24
25
26
27
28
2